Sneak peek of new hex adjacency graph for Indar and a bit more!

Looks great, can't wait to try it!

And I'm glad we're finally getting a test server, hopefully this cuts down on the number of unexpected patch day bugs too.

Nothing is more flexible than a graph.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_(mathematics)

The lattice system is closer to a graph then the corridor system.

And this is why I continue to have no problem investing a lot of time and money into PS2. While there are many things that aren't perfect (the lack of flow being #1), SOE and their team proved in Beta (and continue to uphold) that they're willing to do what it takes to make the best game possible.

PS2 is an amazing shooter right now. I can't wait for it to mature into an amazing tactical strategy game (that happens to be an amazing shooter).

This looks awesome guys, can't wait to try this new system, but what I really wanna know is when your going to fixed the problems that gu4 caused? Because the game just isn't playable for me at 15 fps... Yeah I dropped about 20 - 30 fps and it seems like a lot of other people did too.

This sounds like it could either be cool or really be used to grief factions with a couple of infiltrators tagging a point and then running away.

Maybe make it so that "under contention" is when the area is at least 1/4th complete (1/2 down from the defending faction's bar) or something to that effect.

Additionally, can we make it so that capping an area actually takes a person on the point? Someone flying by to tag a point, convert the capture zone, and fly off seems to detract from real battles.

Sounds great. Just hoping the test servers are at the very least done like "Beta" testing was.. not open 24/7. Some servers have low enough population as it is.

yipee, hybrid lattice/hex system has been officially announced. i can finally sleep at night.

no sarcasm

you say it yourself.

Your removing the sandbox as most people couldn't handle it. Indeed a lot of the problem is, 'Rush' is a familiar mechanic to a lot of people, trying to divine where to fight next by themselves is not. If people really can't handle it, then maybe there needs to be something in game to 'help them'. I'd have maybe gone for more subtle 'nudges' , if you wanted to promote things like base defense. For example people seem to like certs. Likewise simply raising the capture limit of many bases and making its speed relative to size of forces at said base would solve a lot of the ghost capping that actually uptsets people.

My worries

-On busy servers (i.e miller) the Map becomes Zerg v Zerg at about 8 points on the map. Its not just your making it 'easier to find fights' you making it a case where they action is only at the front.
- Without some sort of metagame involving logistics or whatever being slotted in that make the strategy more about taking bases A,B C (from this a drastically more linear process), their will be nothing for smaller outfits to really do. I REALLY CAN'T STRESS THIS ONE ENOUGH, UNLESS THERES MORE TO DO THAN ZERG AROUND, YOU GUYS WILL LOBOTOMIZE THE GAME BY DOING THIS.
- Look at that map, a lot of the biggest, most bat**** 3 ways, will be very hard to come about. For example look at the map you've provided these are not only practically likely to happen on a regulat basis at Allatum and Zuvan.
-The players are going to be heavily deincentivises to fight anywhere thats not colored on the map. I'll have to wait to see how you flesh it out, but my worry is that the maps as are allready have some cool natural features that lend themselves to defense, if you miss them out of the lattice. They then might as well not be on the map.

-You won't really get what you want (i.e Zergs actually colliding) all of the time, as you still won't be incentivising people to move with the path of least resistance, merely that they have less choices in doing so.
-If I drive a sundy out to point A, and point A is well out of the current part of my empires 'live' lattice, can people still spawn off it. If yes, what is the point of doing this previously interesting tactic as I now cannot effect the game?

Prepared to be wrong. But one of PS2's most appealing features to me is its sandbox nature, I think your listening to the wrong people to be franky about it. Just because the community wants something doesn't make it good for the game long or even medium term.

On the other hand overjoyed your finally putting a test server up. I take it we will be able to make at least 3 characters (1 NC, 1 Vs, 1 TR on it? ) IN order to properly test things.

This looks exactly like what I've been (and most PS1 veterans) have been looking for in terms of a metagame. Definitely shows homage to PS1's lattice system.
Truly a really good job, and looks like it will play out great!
The maps in this configuration look fine, except I think that the crown needs 4 points of attack/defence. The one base to the northwest should be connected to it.

Perhaps players could be able in some circumstances to see a 'flag' spawned at X unlinked enemy base, and if they 'capture the flag' by bringing it back to a randomly generated unlinked friendly facility.... The lattice system will change course. (Much like a rail for a train) There could be 10-12 different spots per continent that have these 'switches'. It wouldn't even need to be a CTF mechanic, but it would be sweet to see this, or LLU's make a return. It would be a good attack or defence mechanic, and could be easily worked into the future mission system! Hope this is read by eyes that could help make this a reality! =]

I think a lot is possible with this system. Can't wait to see it happen and play it! GU04 is really great so far, btw!

Sweet! a new free server that will have players from every server on it! I am definitely playing on that instead of Woodman! Feels like Woodman is still being ignored and the experience from the game is nothing compared to what it was like originally... still the 1 or 2 big fights that move around the same bunch of territories, IF you are not part of them it is ghost capping.

fighting does happen at other bases but only if the zerg ends up at that location.

Also I appreciate its a WIP, but a lot of the choices i.e being unable to attack reagent rock from Xeno Tech, having to go to vanu archies by way of snake ravine. Just look artificial, forced and gamey from a strategic perspective.

Moreover, it prompts the question. If all bases are largely pointless but as nodes atm. Then why I am capturing this base, but because its a node in a network? Sure at times the map is going to lend itself to these choices being logical, but if your going to make it "3-4 connections" say and making ti balanced so no one empire has points where ti has to defend or attack through a more complex network than exists elsewhere on the map. Certain places where corridors branch, are going to appear really forced and gamey, because well.. they are.

I think some sort of metagame needs to take priority over activating corridor mode.

This. QFT.

Also the whole idea of making bases contested that are adjacent to another base that was originally being contested sounds amazing for relief operations!!

Now now, credit where credit is due. Malorn has been pushing for this for a long time now.

While I commend the effort, and hope it works, I don't quite see it as that optimistic.
Why?
Because 'dispersing' is what I want to do.
When my faction was just beat at an outpost by a giant tank zerg, the last thing I want to do is face them again, outnumbered, and have no fun for the entire next hour until they are inevitably crushed either at our warpgate or by a counterzerg.
Hell, I often have to spawn at the warpgate because I find no spawn near, say, an Aircraft terminal, despite being only a half kilometer away from the next large base.
Large battles are nice and all, but I want strategic flanking maneuvers.
What good is the implementation of interesting features like blocking a capture by contesting the supply line, if there's no way to even get there to contest anything in the first place?
Besides capping another lane, yeah, that's gonna happen.

Indeed, credit where its due

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/16q7ic/announcing_the_first_community_design_meeting/

And pretty much 30-40% of the PS1 community has been screaming Lattice since the beginning of beta.

So yeah, lets be careful about who we assign credit to eh?

I have spoken alot with my outfit about that secret little tweet awhile ago [Heart of Darkness - NC - Waterson], and as a smaller outfit we are all on the fence about it. The biggest danger to the small outfits is running directly into the head of the enemy zerg while you are trying to nibble at their edges or redirect forces from their efforts. A map system like this would certainly be very similar to the Planetside 1 lattice system (we have many PS1 vets), which was fantastic for funneling the fights; and I don't think anyone is arguing about how fun those big battles can be.

However on the level of a small sort of "Spec Ops" outfit it concerns us that we won't be able to get around that massive big fight to the smaller peripheral fights... because they won't exist. As the system is now (aware, it's a work in progress) there is only really a few practical directions a fight will move; meaning there will either be overwhelming forces in either direction or no appreciable resistance in one. While there are jobs to be done in the large fights by small organized groups, it isn't quite the same as moving around the Zerg, attacking their flank, and fighting a little turf war with a similar oriented enemy outfit. These tasks all seem to be more what you would detach a platoons squad for.

Looking at it all, I think the best way to achieve both goals and support both playstyles is to connect the facilities by the roads; instead of forming an arbitrary number of what type of facility must connect to what. Indar, Amerish and Esamir all have a very logical and well defined transit system. Linking the facilities by ALL the roads creates more possible divergences while creating very defined paths of assault. It highlights the import of developed infrastructure in warfare, and it allows the terrain to naturally dictate the flow of battle. As it should. The most difficult part will be determining where nearby facilities SHOULD be connected for the sake of their flow - such as Xenotech to Regent Rock. A very common and logical next step from both directions.

Though just looking at it all quick-like Xenotech could be connected to Regent Rock via the crossroad that connects Snake Ravine, Regent Rock, Xenotech and Crossroads watchtower, and then the Regent Rock hex could be the primary control hex to the road down to Broken Arch.

It needs some level of metagame, a la PS1's gens, or the proposed logistics system, that gives smaller outfits a point.

IF the battles, indeed the strategic flow of the game boils down to zerg v zerg, there is little point in being in anything other than a zerg or a zergfit.

I'm not trying to say that the PS1 crowd didn't want it or that other devs didn't want it. I never had the opportunity to play PS1 myself and I even thought the game needed this too. All I'm saying was Malorn has been a big backer of this for a very long time now. I'd name others but I'm not really sure who they are. I'm not 100% up on who's who on the dev team.

Feedback:

Let's start with saying that everything not mentioned is OK or at least is neutral.

Now let's go in for the "good" and "bad" part

Good:

• Scarred Mesa Skydock not affecting Tawrich adjacency.
• The Crown being able to get cut off (despite what would seem 2 TR links, in reality, the upper link usually belongs to the Northern gateholders).
• Howling Pass being very distinct now not only through the landscape, but also visually on the map.
• ARC Bioengineering is not the most useless hex now.

Bad:

• Leopardwood Nursery being a useless hex.
• Hvar is hex-cluster****ed.
• If I read the map right, the Rashnu Tower is connected directly to Howling Pass. NS Material Storage was a good and necessary checkpoint, no need to remove it.
• Saurva adjacency design as opposed to other bases. In reality this Biolab is the least contested territory, I don't see a point in making it more defensible than the bases close to the frontline. If anything it should be vice versa.

Anyway props to the "mappers"!

I really don't like this system and would prefer to stick with the current system.